Supply chain transformational leadership and resilience: the mediating role of ambidextrous business model

The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the vulnerability of global supply chains, underscoring the critical need for firms to develop resilient supply chains. Supply chain resilience (SCR) refers to a system's ability to maintain desirable functions before, during, and after disruptions. While prior research has explored the influence of resources and capabilities on SCR, the role of leadership, specifically supply chain transformational leadership (SCTL), remains largely unexplored. This study addresses this gap by examining how SCTL influences SCR. SCTL is defined as the continuous influence exerted by a firm, demonstrating values and reformative behaviors that inspire and foster close relationships with supply chain partners, motivating them to adopt similar practices. The study hypothesizes that SCTL enhances SCR, focusing on its proactive (mitigating shocks) and reactive (responding to and recovering from disruptions) dimensions. The researchers posit that this relationship is mediated by an ambidextrous business model, which balances exploration (novelty-centered) and exploitation (efficiency-centered) activities, and moderated by paradox cognition (the ability to recognize and manage contradictory demands). The study's significance lies in its contribution to understanding how leadership can foster more resilient supply chains, a crucial element for firms operating in dynamic and uncertain environments.

The literature review examines existing research on supply chain resilience, highlighting the diversity of definitions and dimensions. The review categorizes SCR into proactive and reactive components and identifies various antecedents, including supply chain reengineering, collaboration, agility, and risk management culture. The review then delves into the concept of transformational leadership, its established impact on employee attitudes and team resilience, and its potential application to the supply chain context. Social learning theory provides the foundation for understanding how the focal firm's transformational leadership influences its supply chain partners' behavior. Finally, the review explores the concept of organizational ambidexterity and its relevance to supply chain resilience, linking it to the ability to balance exploration and exploitation activities. The concept of paradox cognition is introduced as a potential moderator, influencing the firm's ability to embrace contradictory strategic agendas and foster ambidexterity.

This study employed a quantitative research design, gathering data from 317 Chinese manufacturing firms across five provinces representing diverse economic conditions. A questionnaire, developed through interviews and expert review, measured key constructs: SCTL, paradox cognition, ambidextrous business model (combining novelty- and efficiency-centered dimensions), proactive SCR, and reactive SCR. To mitigate common method bias (CMB), the questionnaire was split into two parts, administered to different respondents within each firm. The study controlled for factors such as firm size, age, industry, ownership, and competitive intensity. The reliability and validity of the measurement scales were assessed using Cronbach's alpha, exploratory factor analysis (EFA), and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Harman's single-factor test and additional CFA analyses were conducted to evaluate CMB. Hierarchical regression analysis and bootstrapping were employed to test the hypotheses, utilizing mean-centering to manage multicollinearity. Simple slope analysis was applied to further examine the moderating effect of paradox cognition.

The hierarchical regression analysis and bootstrapping results supported the hypotheses. SCTL was found to have a significant positive influence on both proactive and reactive SCR (H1a and H1b). SCTL also positively influenced the ambidextrous business model (H2). The ambidextrous business model, in turn, significantly and positively influenced both proactive and reactive SCR (H3a and H3b). Furthermore, the ambidextrous business model fully mediated the relationship between SCTL and proactive SCR and partially mediated the relationship between SCTL and reactive SCR (H4a and H4b). Finally, paradox cognition significantly strengthened the positive relationship between SCTL and the ambidextrous business model (H5), as confirmed by simple slope analysis. The findings indicate that a firm's SCTL positively impacts its supply chain's resilience, and this positive impact is mediated by the firm's ability to operate with an ambidextrous business model. The strength of this mediating effect is enhanced when the firm's leadership fosters a climate of paradox cognition.

The findings address the research questions by demonstrating a clear positive link between SCTL and SCR, mediated by the adoption of an ambidextrous business model. The results support the social learning theory framework, showing that transformational leadership behaviors set an example that supply chain partners emulate. The significant mediating role of the ambidextrous business model highlights the importance of balancing exploration and exploitation strategies in achieving supply chain resilience. The moderating role of paradox cognition reinforces the significance of organizational culture and leadership's capacity to manage contradictory demands in building resilience. The findings have significant theoretical implications, enriching our understanding of the antecedents of SCR and revealing a crucial mediating mechanism. The study contributes to practical applications by providing actionable insights for managers seeking to enhance their supply chains' resilience.

This study makes significant contributions to the literature on supply chain resilience and transformational leadership. It identifies SCTL as a key antecedent of SCR, highlights the mediating role of an ambidextrous business model, and reveals the moderating impact of paradox cognition. The findings offer valuable managerial implications, suggesting that leaders should cultivate transformational leadership qualities, promote ambidextrous business models, and foster paradox cognition within their organizations to improve supply chain resilience. Future research could explore other leadership styles, investigate additional mediating mechanisms, and examine the influence of various contextual factors on these relationships.

The study's limitations include its focus on Chinese manufacturing firms, potentially limiting the generalizability of the findings to other contexts. Future research should examine the generalizability of the findings across different industries and geographical regions. Additionally, the reliance on self-reported data from questionnaires raises the potential for bias. Future studies could employ multiple data sources or methods such as interviews or observations to enhance the robustness of the results. Lastly, the study does not account for the impact of external factors, focusing primarily on internal organizational dynamics. Future research might explore the interaction between internal factors and external shocks in determining supply chain resilience.